Light in a Dark Place: The Doctrine of Scripture

Thank you for downloading this Crossway book.

Sign up for the Crossway Newsletter for updates on special offers, new resources, and exciting global ministry initiatives:

Crossway Newsletter

Or, if you prefer, we would love to connect with you online:

John Feinberg has written a splendid work that brilliantly expounds and winsomely defends a classical evangelical doctrine of Scripture. Readers will discover an engaging and comprehensive exploration of topics such as revelation, inspiration, inerrancy, authority, and canonicity, among others. This thoughtful and clearly written volume will certainly be welcomed by students, scholars, pastors, and church leaders alike. It is a genuine joy and privilege to recommend this most recent addition to the outstanding Foundations of Evangelical Theology series.

David S. Dockery, President, Trinity International University

Building on a lifetime of scholarship, John Feinberg provides us with a superb exploration of the ‘perfections’ of Scripture for a new generation. This is a wise, well-informed, and very important summary of the normative source of faith and practice. What a gift!

Michael Horton, J. Gresham Machen Professor of Systematic Theology and Apologetics, Westminster Seminary California

"In 1978, a young theologian, John Feinberg, signed the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, a watershed document for contemporary evangelicalism. Forty years later, as a veteran scholar, he makes another significant contribution to the evangelical doctrine of Scripture, extending his treatment beyond its inerrancy to include inspiration, authority, canonicity, clarity, power, sufficiency, preservation, and intersection with the work of the Holy Spirit. Light in a Dark Place is a must-read for scholars, pastors, believers, and skeptics alike!"

Gregg Allison, Professor of Christian Theology, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary; Elder, Sojourn Community Church; author, Sojourners and Strangers; Roman Catholic Theology and Practice; and Historical Theology

"The doctrine of Scripture serves as the foundational doctrine of Christian theology. Apart from God’s triune self-disclosure in Scripture, which results in a fully authoritative and reliable Word, everything we say about God, ourselves, and the world is ultimately left unwarranted. For this reason, every generation needs a robust and faithful exposition and defense of Scripture as God’s Word written in light of current challenges and debates. From a seasoned theologian who leaves no stone unturned, Light in a Dark Place wonderfully meets this need. In this volume, John Feinberg discusses the most significant points of the doctrine of Scripture and tackles some of the toughest issues the doctrine faces today with precision and care. This book will serve as a superb resource for today’s church, and it demands a careful reading and embrace of its faithful elucidation of Scripture as God’s most holy Word. I highly commend this work."

Stephen Wellum, Professor, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary

Light in a Dark Place

Foundations of Evangelical Theology Series

John

S

.

Feinberg

,

General

Editor

To Know and Love God: Method for Theology

David K. Clark

Light in a Dark Place: The Doctrine of Scripture

John S. Feinberg

No One Like Him: The Doctrine of God

John S. Feinberg

God the Son Incarnate: The Doctrine of Christ

Stephen J. Wellum

He Who Gives Life: The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit

Graham A. Cole

The Cross and Salvation: The Doctrine of Salvation

Bruce Demarest

Sojourners and Strangers: The Doctrine of the Church

Gregg R. Allison

Light in a Dark Place

The Doctrine of Scripture

John S. Feinberg

Light in a Dark Place: The Doctrine of Scripture

Copyright © 2018 by John S. Feinberg

Published by Crossway

1300 Crescent Street

Wheaton, Illinois 60187

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher, except as provided for by USA copyright law. Crossway® is a registered trademark in the United States of America.

First printing 2018

Printed in the United States of America

Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations are from The New American Standard Bible®. Copyright © The Lockman Foundation 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977. Used by permission.

Scripture quotations marked ESV are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Scripture references marked NIV 1984 are taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

Scripture quotations marked KJV are from the King James Version of the Bible.

Scripture quotations marked AT are the author’s translation.

All emphases in Scripture quotations have been added by the author.

Hardcover ISBN: 978-1-4335-3927-5

ePub ISBN: 978-1-4335-3930-5

PDF ISBN: 978-1-4335-3928-2

Mobipocket ISBN: 978-1-4335-3929-9

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Feinberg, John S., 1946- author.

Title: Light in a dark place : the doctrine of scripture / John S. Feinberg.

Description: Wheaton : Crossway, 2018. | Series: Foundations of evangelical theology series | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2017038729 (print) | LCCN 2018000857 (ebook) | ISBN 9781433539282 (pdf) | ISBN 9781433539299 (mobi) | ISBN 9781433539305 (epub) | ISBN 9781433539275 (hc)

Subjects: LCSH: Bible—Evidences, authority, etc. | Reformed Church—Doctrines.

Classification: LCC BS480 (ebook) | LCC BS480 .F45 2018 (print) | DDC 220.1—dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017038729

Crossway is a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers.

2022-02-11 04:05:14 PM

To

Colleagues, Past and Present,

in the

Department of Biblical and Systematic Theology

At Trinity Evangelical Divinity School,

This Volume Is Dedicated

with Undying Love, Respect,

and Appreciation

Contents

Tables

Series Introduction

Preface

Abbreviations

1  Introduction

PART ONE:

Creating Scripture

2  Light Unveiled: The Doctrine of Revelation

3  Light Unveiled (II): Special Revelation

4  Light Written: The Inspiration of Scripture

5  Light Written (II): Other Biblical Testimony about Scripture’s Inspiration

6  Light Written (III): Theological Formulation of the Doctrine of Inspiration

PART TWO:

Characteristics of Scripture

7  True Light: Inerrancy and Infallibility

8  True Light (II): Objections to Inerrancy

9  True Light (III): More Objections to Inerrancy

10  Divine Commanding Light: The Authority of Scripture

PART THREE:

Setting the Boundaries

11  Light Canonized: The Doctrine of Canonicity

12  Light Canonized (II): Scripture on Canonicity

13  Light Canonized (III): Old Testament Canonicity

14  Light Canonized (IV): New Testament Canonicity

PART FOUR:

The Usefulness of Scripture

15  Light Embraced: The Doctrine of Illumination

16  Clear, Understandable Light: The Doctrine of Perspicuity/Clarity

17  Living, Powerful Light: The Animation of Scripture

18  Light Enough: The Sufficiency of Scripture

19  Enduring Light: The Preservation of Scripture

CONCLUSION

20  Light in a Dark Place: Does It Make a Difference?

Scripture Index

General Index

Tables

6.1  Analogies

6.2  Failures of Analogy

6.3  Enns’s Views–Failures of Analogy

Series Introduction

Why another series of works on evangelical systematic theology? This is an especially appropriate question in light of the fact that evangelicals are fully committed to an inspired and inerrant Bible as their final authority for faith and practice. But since neither God nor the Bible change, why is there a need to redo evangelical systematic theology?

Systematic theology is not divine revelation. Theologizing of any sort is a human conceptual enterprise. Thinking that it is equal to biblical revelation misunderstands the nature of both Scripture and theology! Insofar as our theology contains propositions that accurately reflect Scripture or match the world and are consistent with the Bible (in cases where the propositions do not come per se from Scripture), our theology is biblically based and correct. But even if all the propositions of a systematic theology are true, that theology would still not be equivalent to biblical revelation! It is still a human conceptualization of God and his relation to the world.

Although this may disturb some who see theology as nothing more than doing careful exegesis over a series of passages, and others who see it as nothing more than biblical theology, those methods of doing theology do not somehow produce a theology that is equivalent to biblical revelation either. Exegesis is a human conceptual enterprise, and so is biblical theology. All the theological disciplines involve human intellectual participation. But human intellect is finite, and hence there is always room for revision of systematic theology as knowledge increases. Though God and his word do not change, human understanding of his revelation can grow, and our theologies should be reworked to reflect those advances in understanding.

Another reason for evangelicals to rework their theology is the nature of systematic theology as opposed to other theological disciplines. For example, whereas the task of biblical theology is more to describe biblical teaching on whatever topics Scripture addresses, systematics should make a special point to relate its conclusions to the issues of one’s day. This does not mean that the systematician ignores the topics biblical writers address. Nor does it mean that theologians should warp Scripture to address issues it never intended to address. Rather it suggests that in addition to expounding what biblical writers teach, the theologian should attempt to take those biblical teachings (along with the biblical mind-set) and apply them to issues that are especially confronting the church in the theologian’s own day. For example, 150 years ago, an evangelical theologian doing work on the doctrine of man would likely have discussed issues such as the creation of man and the constituent parts of man’s being. Such a theology might even have included a discussion about human institutions such as marriage, noting in general the respective roles of husbands and wives in marriage. However, it is dubious that there would have been any lengthy discussion with various viewpoints about the respective roles of men and women in marriage, in society, and in the church. But at our point in history and in light of the feminist movement and the issues it has raised even among many conservative Christians, it would be foolish to write a theology of man (or, should we say, a theology of humanity) without a thorough discussion of the issue of the roles of men and women in society, the home, and the church.

Because systematic theology attempts to address itself not only to the timeless issues presented in Scripture but also to the current issues of one’s day and culture, each theology will to some extent need to be redone in each generation. Biblical truth does not change from generation to generation, but the issues that confront the church do. A theology that was adequate for a different era and different culture may simply not speak to key issues in a given culture at a given time. Hence, in this series we are reworking evangelical systematic theology, though we do so with the understanding that in future generations there will be room for a revision of theology again.

How, then, do the contributors to this series understand the nature of systematic theology? Systematic theology as done from an evangelical Christian perspective involves study of the person, works, and relationships of God. As evangelicals committed to the full inspiration, inerrancy, and final authority of Scripture, we demand that whatever appears in a systematic theology correspond to the way things are and must not contradict any claim taught in Scripture. Holy Writ is the touchstone of our theology, but we do not limit the source material for systematics to Scripture alone. Hence, whatever information from history, science, philosophy, and the like is relevant to our understanding of God and his relation to our world is fair game for systematics. Depending on the specific interests and expertise of the contributors to this series, their respective volumes will reflect interaction with one or more of these disciplines.

What is the rationale for appealing to other sources than Scripture and other disciplines than the biblical ones? Since God created the universe, there is revelation of God not only in Scripture but in the created order as well. There are many disciplines that study our world, just as does theology. But since the world studied by the nontheological disciplines is the world created by God, any data and conclusions in the so-called secular disciplines that accurately reflect the real world are also relevant to our understanding of the God who made that world. Hence, in a general sense, since all of creation is God’s work, nothing is outside the realm of theology. The so-called secular disciplines need to be thought of in a theological context, because they are reflecting on the universe God created, just as is the theologian. And, of course, there are many claims in the nontheological disciplines that are generally accepted as true (although this does not mean that every claim in nontheological disciplines is true, or that we are in a position with respect to every proposition to know whether it is true or false). Since this is so, and since all disciplines are in one way or another reflecting on our universe, a universe made by God, any true statement in any discipline should in some way be informative for our understanding of God and his relation to our world. Hence, we have felt it appropriate to incorporate data from outside the Bible in our theological formulations.

As to the specific design of this series, our intention is to address all areas of evangelical theology with a special emphasis on key issues in each area. While other series may be more like a history of doctrine, this series purposes to incorporate insights from Scripture, historical theology, philosophy, etc., in order to produce an up-to-date work in systematic theology. Though all contributors to the series are thoroughly evangelical in their theology, embracing the historical orthodox doctrines of the church, the series as a whole is not meant to be slanted in the direction of one form of evangelical theology. Nonetheless, most of the writers come from a Reformed perspective. Alternate evangelical and nonevangelical options, however, are discussed.

As to style and intended audience, this series is meant to rest on the very best of scholarship while at the same time being understandable to the beginner in theology as well as to the academic theologian. With that in mind, contributors are writing in a clear style, taking care to define whatever technical terms they use.

Finally, we believe that systematic theology is not just for the understanding. It must apply to life, and it must be lived. As Paul wrote to Timothy, God has given divine revelation for many purposes, including ones that necessitate doing theology, but the ultimate reason for giving revelation and for theologians doing theology is that the people of God may be fitted for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16–17). In light of the need for theology to connect to life, each of the contributors not only formulates doctrines but also explains how those doctrines practically apply to everyday living.

It is our sincerest hope that the work we have done in this series will first glorify and please God, and, secondly, instruct and edify the people of God. May God be pleased to use this series to those ends, and may he richly bless you as you read the fruits of our labors.

John S. Feinberg

General Editor

Preface

Scripture is both the hallmark and foundation of evangelical theology. This is so because evangelicals believe that it is the word of God. Since the subject matter of theology is God’s person, works, and relationships, any theologian needs to consult sources as he or she prepares to write a theology. For evangelical theologians, the primary and governing source is Scripture. This is so because it presents God’s views on the subject matter of theology. As omniscient, God knows more about any and every subject than does anyone else, and since the subject matter of theology is God himself, of course he knows more about that topic than anyone.

It would be, therefore, wise for any theologian to take Scripture seriously, if he or she wants to know what to say about the various doctrines of systematic theology. Such is at least part of the rationale for Scripture being so foundational to evangelical theology. Of course, this mind-set also means that evangelical theologians turn to Scripture as their governing source, because they actually believe that it is what God himself has said about the topics it covers. And if it is, then it must tell us the truth about whatever it addresses. Of course, as the word of the supreme ruler in the universe and as true, it also possesses supreme authority over all of life.

What, then, does Scripture tell us about its own nature? Suppose, for example, Scripture says that it offers some general religious ideas, words expressing how much various writers have loved and appreciated God, a few suggestions about human behavior, and some history about God’s interaction with various people (because such stories are interesting, even if they teach us nothing about what God expects of us). That kind of Bible might offer stimulating reading, but it wouldn’t help us in addressing life’s most pressing and significant issues.

On the other hand, suppose Scripture tells us that it is God’s inerrant word and that it has supreme and binding authority on all people. Yes, it offers descriptions of God’s character and actions, and explains how humans can establish a saving relationship with God, and tells us what sort of behavior is acceptable in God’s eyes, but none of this is simply information that we can merely be aware of intellectually and then push aside as we go on with our lives on our own terms. It has binding authority on every human. We can reject it, ignore it, or obey only the parts of it that we like, but nonetheless, we are accountable to what it teaches, and will be judged by what we have done with what it commands.

In the previous two paragraphs I have described two very different views of what Scripture is and of how we should relate to it. Which description fits what Scripture actually says about itself? That is the subject of the doctrine of Scripture and therefore of this book. As we shall see, the second vision of Scripture’s nature is the one it affirms. But, then, it should be clear as to why evangelicals take Scripture so seriously, and why it must be the basis of evangelical systematic theology. If evangelicals are right in their assessment of Scripture’s nature, then of course it must be the primary source material and final authority on what anyone should believe about any and every area of systematic theology. Hence, the volumes in this theology series are unapologetically grounded in Scripture and take as their main task the articulation of what Scripture teaches about the particular doctrinal locus under consideration.

Clearly, the doctrine of Scripture is a most important subject. A book on this doctrine certainly needs to get it right about what we should believe about this book. Given the importance of the task at hand and the need to reflect accurately what Scripture teaches about itself, lest we misrepresent God and what he has said about this book, it would be easy to pass on the chance to write a volume on Scripture. But I welcome the challenge, in part because it is such an important topic, and so basic to anything else one might do in systematic theology. And, I embrace this task, because I love Scripture, and I know from firsthand experience how powerful and transforming this book can be in individual lives. I am hoping that as you read the chapters of this book and come to see better what a treasure Scripture is and also understand everything God has done to give it to us, your love and appreciation to God will also grow, and that you will commit, or recommit, yourself to reading and obeying what Scripture teaches and requires!

A book of this nature and length does not, of course, get written with little thought and effort. And it certainly cannot be done without the help of many people. Some people have been especially significant in helping me to produce this volume. First, I must thank Crossway for its support of the whole Foundations of Evangelical Theology Series and of my doing this volume on Scripture. We began this series many years ago. A lesser publisher would have pulled the plug on the series long ago, assuming that they would have ever agreed to contract it in the first place—I have doubts about whether any other publisher would have done so. As to this volume on Scripture, Crossway has been enthusiastic, patient, and encouraging to me all along the way as I have worked on it! And a special word of thanks is due to Bill Deckard, the very best academic editor I’ve ever known and worked with! His knowledge of grammar, proper style, and everything else that goes along with academic books is unmatched. And his care in attending to everything—big issues or small—gives authors like me the assurance that what we want to say will be presented as accurately and clearly as possible.

Next, I want to thank the administration and board of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School for granting me sabbaticals and leaves of absence to work on this volume. In fact, the whole book was produced during a series of sabbaticals approved by Trinity, so this volume is indeed a result of Trinity’s generous sabbatical policy, and I am extremely grateful for Trinity’s generous support and encouragement.

Then, a very special word of appreciation goes to my friend and colleague Graham A. Cole. He read and commented on an earlier version of the whole book, and those comments have been extremely helpful in bringing the book into its present form. This volume is definitely better because of his interaction and advice! Errors that still remain are, of course, mine and not his.

I am also extremely grateful to many graduate student assistants who helped me tremendously in gathering articles and books that I needed to read. Without their efforts, it would have taken much longer to complete this work. Most of them were doctoral students in systematic theology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, and they are already doing significant work in the discipline of systematic theology. They have great potential as teachers and scholars, and I find that very encouraging!

Then, I have a special appreciation and thanks for colleagues, past and present, in the Department of Biblical and Systematic Theology at Trinity. All of them are fully devoted to Scripture as God’s inspired and inerrant word, and they are most able defenders of an evangelical understanding of Scripture. Having them as friends, colleagues, and dialogue partners has always been extremely helpful to me and my work. And, their interest and many first-rate publications on the doctrine of Scripture are not only instructive about the doctrine, but have also inspired me as I have worked on this volume. As every academic knows, whom you have to talk with about what you are thinking and writing makes a huge difference in what you can produce. Being in this environment for more than three decades has made a huge contribution to me in every way. So it is only fitting and proper that I dedicate this volume to all of my department colleagues, past and present, at Trinity!

As you read this volume, may your appreciation of God grow, and may you be strongly encouraged not only to study Scripture more earnestly and consistently, but also to obey what it teaches! And may your heart be warmed and your life guided by Scripture so that you become the prosperous/happy/blessed person described in Psalm 1! That is possible if your life is firmly rooted and grounded in Scripture, a light in a dark place!

John S. Feinberg

August 2017

Abbreviations

Chapter

One

Introduction

Life without light is unthinkable, impossible! God is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all (1 John 1:5). And God lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see (1 Tim. 6:16 NIV 1984). So to try to live without God and to embrace moral and spiritual blindness instead would be as foolish as if someone with perfect natural vision deliberately blinded himself, choosing instead to live the rest of his natural life in absolute darkness.

Of course, some people through no fault of their own are physically blind. We admire their courage and tenacity as they struggle each day to handle this infirmity and try to live anything like a normal life. It is hard to believe, however, that anyone who can see would choose a life of blindness, or that any blind person wouldn’t gladly choose to see, if merely willing it could make it so.

As debilitating as natural blindness is, spiritual blindness is even worse. For it seeks to defeat us during our natural life on earth, and ruin our eternity. Darkness challenges every aspect of our existence.

God, of course, fully knows this; we would expect nothing else. Moreover, our beneficent creator knows exactly what we need in each area of life, and he has provided it. In particular, God gave three special expressions of light to meet life’s most pressing needs.

The first is creation light. In Genesis 1, we read that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (v. 1). But the earth as initially created was formless and void, and darkness was everywhere (v. 2). So what did God do next? Divide the land from the water? Create any of the creatures that would inhabit this new world? No, God first spoke physical light into existence (v. 3). On the fourth day of creation, he created the sun, moon and stars, and placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth (v. 17). God knew that no natural life could exist without these lights, and so he created them.

God later created the first man and woman to live in the paradise he had made. As created, they were morally and spiritually right with God, for they had never sinned. But sadly, they bowed to temptation and chose to disobey the one rule God gave them, plunging themselves and the whole human race into moral and spiritual darkness (Gen. 3:6; Rom. 5:12ff.).

This was and is a problem no mere human can possibly solve. But without a solution the race would be condemned to live forever apart from fellowship with its creator. That would lead only to endless suffering and separation from the blessing and presence of the God who desperately wants a loving relation with us.

Again, God had the solution. The human race needed another infusion of divine light! This time it was redemption light. God sent his Son Jesus to pay the penalty that sin had incurred, so that fellowship between God and humans could be reestablished. Jesus said, I am the light of the world; he who follows Me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life (John 8:12). The darkness of which Jesus spoke is moral and spiritual darkness. Those who have followed Christ by faith can well attest that he is the light of their lives, both now and for eternity.

There is a third form of divine light, revelation light, given again to meet humans’ needs. In his second epistle, the apostle Peter wrote about it. Peter wrote this letter toward the end of his life, and he wanted to remind his readers of things he had told them many times before. He began chapter 1 with a reminder that God has given believers everything they need for life and godliness, and he has promised great blessing to those who follow him (2 Pet. 1:3–4). In light of that, they should reject the moral corruption of this world and make every effort to develop Christian virtues. If they do, they will make their calling and election sure, and they will be warmly welcomed into Jesus Christ’s everlasting kingdom (vv. 5–11 KJV).

Undoubtedly, Peter had encouraged his readers to godly living on many other occasions, but it was right for him to refresh their memories, especially because he knew that before long his mortal life on earth would end and he would go to be with the Lord (vv. 12–14). In verses 16–21 Peter rehearsed for his readers one more time the basis of the hope that he and they had for eternal life and blessing. He knew that salvation with all of its blessings is a marvelously wonderful hope for followers of Christ. But Peter also knew that some things sound much better than they actually are. So, how did Peter know that the gospel and its blessings were true? Perhaps all of that is just a cleverly devised story to make people feel secure (v. 16), but has no basis in fact. In the rest of chapter 1, Peter explained why the blessings of which he wrote are not just wishful thinking. They aren’t because there are two guarantees that the gospel is absolutely true.

Peter and the other apostles proclaimed many amazing things about Jesus. How could they be sure that what they said about him was true? Peter says that he knew that Jesus is all he claimed to be, first, because of the experience that he, James, and John had at the Mount of Transfiguration (vv. 16–18). During most of Jesus’s earthly life, there was little outward, physical evidence that he was the glorious and all-powerful Lord of glory. But Peter, James, and John caught a glimpse of his true majesty when they saw him transfigured, and heard the voice from heaven saying, This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased (Matt. 17:5).

We often say that seeing is believing. Peter says, in effect, I was there, and I saw and heard, and I believed. Clearly, this event was irrefutable proof for Peter that Jesus was everything he ever claimed to be (2 Pet. 1:17). But Peter knew that only three mere humans witnessed the Mount of Transfiguration event. Peter, James, and John were convinced, and many of their followers believed because they knew these men to be honest and reliable witnesses. But how could others be sure, especially those living at other times and places than in first-century-AD Israel?

In verses 19–21 Peter adds a second reason that anyone can be sure that Jesus is everything he claimed to be. In fact, Peter says that this second evidence is even more certain than his eyewitness testimony (v. 19). That is truly remarkable, for we usually think that there is no better proof of a claim than tangible, empirical evidence, especially eyewitness testimony. What could be stronger proof than that?

Peter’s answer? Scripture! Why? Because Scripture, though penned by mere humans, was inspired by God, who supervised the writers and their writing at every step along the way (vv. 20–21). Peter had no doubts about what he saw and heard as he followed Jesus, but he knew that even eyewitness testimony can sometimes be mistaken. Peter and the other apostles weren’t wrong about what they saw and heard Jesus do and say. But even so, Peter says that Scripture is even more certainly true than their eyewitness testimony! Whatever Scripture says is unassailably true, and hence, totally reliable—something all can stake their very life on!

Because Scripture is even more certainly true than the most reliable eyewitness testimony, Peter advised his readers (v. 19), you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. There you have it—the third form of light God gave to guide and protect humans as we live in this world of moral and spiritual darkness: Scripture is a light in a dark place.

From the earliest days of my life, through my childhood and adolescence, and throughout my adult life, Scripture has been the foundation of my life. My parents taught my siblings and me that no one is more important than God, and so if God says anything, we must give it our undivided attention, and obey it. Like others, my life has been blessed with many light places, but there have been dark places as well. What has always remained the same, regardless of circumstance, is the light that Scripture casts upon my way.

And so, I have always loved Scripture, especially as I grew and studied it more. In my preaching and teaching ministries, Scripture has always been and continues to be the foundation and content of whatever I say. In addition, as a teacher of theology, I have the extremely great privilege of teaching others about Scripture.

Scripture is a ray of divine light in a dark place, but we can and should say much more about it. How did Scripture ever come into existence? Why is it so important that we learn and live its content? Can Scripture be trusted in what it says, regardless of the topic?

All of these questions and more demarcate the issues that must be addressed in a book on the doctrine of Scripture. I write unapologetically from a firmly embraced evangelical stance. That means, in part, that as a theologian, I assume that apologists and philosophers of religion have made the case that Scripture is trustworthy in whatever it says about any topic. Given that belief, what does Scripture teach about itself? That is the subject of this volume. I contend that Scripture claims to be the inspired, inerrant, and powerful revealed word of God. Moreover, Scripture also affirms that its basic message of how to establish and grow a positive relationship with God is understandable, and that the Holy Spirit stands ever ready to move and enable each person to apply Scripture’s teachings to his or her life so as to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I believe all of these things about Scripture, and more, because, as I shall show in this book, they are what Scripture teaches about itself. I also know it to be true from personal experience, and from seeing Scripture’s transforming power in the lives of people who obey it.

Evangelicals are people of the book—the Bible. The hallmark of evangelical theology is its contention that Scripture is God’s inspired and inerrant word. Given that belief, evangelical theology strives to be consistent with whatever Scripture claims. And there is very good reason for this understanding of and approach to theology. Systematic theology covers the person, works, and relationships of God. Of course, a crucial question then becomes, what is theology’s source material? Nonevangelical theology typically is based on tradition, human reason, and/or some current worldview or philosophy. Scripture may also be a source, but it isn’t the touchstone of nonevangelical thinking. If Scripture disagrees with the prevailing philosophy and mind-set of the nonevangelical thinker, Scripture is adjusted to match the theologian’s vision of reality and God’s place in it.

Evangelical theology is different. While it may use as source material data from various disciplines of study, its primary and governing source is Scripture. Moreover, scriptural teaching, properly interpreted, is the touchstone for anything that goes into an evangelical theology. If the data one proposes to include in theology disagree with Scripture, the data must be either rejected or revised to fit the vision of reality that Scripture presents.

Why does evangelical theology take this approach? The answer is rather simple. The subject matter of theology is God and his relationships with all creation. Who would know the most about what should go into a conceptual scheme that aims to articulate an accurate picture of God? No one knows as much as God does! So, then, if God tells us something about himself, his deeds, his relationships, and anything else he cares to communicate, that information should be the most complete and accurate information available, and hence, it should be the foundation of our theology.

Where can one find such information? That’s where Scripture enters the picture. Though Scripture is not the only place God has revealed himself, it is a marvelously thorough, accurate, and clear deposit of the things God most wants us to know about himself, ourselves, and our relation to him. Evangelicals believe that Scripture is God’s word, and since no one knows more than God, we would do well to base our thinking on God’s word, the Bible. This is why Scripture must be the foundation of evangelical theology, provide its main contents, and be the touchstone against which any and every theological claim is judged.

And so, in this volume I intend to present the various concepts involved in the doctrine of Scripture. I have divided my presentation into four parts. The first deals with how Scripture first came into existence. That is, it covers the creation of Scripture. The concepts of revelation and inspiration explain how Scripture came into existence. The second section treats various attributes or characteristics that are true of Scripture. The discussion will focus on the inerrancy and authority of God’s word.

Of course, a discussion of Scripture invariably addresses how it was decided which books would be part of Scripture. Thus, the third portion of our study investigates the boundaries of Scripture. The issue in view is, of course, canonicity. The key question is, what criteria were used to decide which books should be part of the Bible and which should not be?

The final section of this book covers the usefulness of Scripture. In this section I shall discuss various reasons why Scripture can accomplish so many things in people’s lives. Some chapters in this section will focus on qualities of Scripture, so they could easily be placed in the second section of the book. But I have placed chapters such as the ones on Scripture’s clarity, power, and sufficiency in this fourth section because all of these attributes of Scripture are so crucial to understanding and applying Scripture in individual lives. Of course, without the ministry of the Holy Spirit, Scripture is a dead letter to its recipients. Thus, this portion of the book also includes a chapter on the Holy Spirit’s illumination of the minds and hearts of Scripture’s readers to Scripture’s message.

Clearly, in the doctrine of Scripture much more is at stake than merely filling in the details of this doctrinal locus in an overall system of theology. What is at stake is what one thinks Scripture to be, how one understands the person of God, and whether one is required to live as Scripture prescribes. If Scripture is merely a compendium of religiously pious thoughts of religiously sensitive people and nothing more, then we may find it inspirational and instructive, but we shouldn’t feel any urgency to live in accord with its teachings. But if Scripture is, as evangelicals and their theology have affirmed throughout history, the very word of our almighty, omniscient, and all-loving God, then the only sane choice is to let it enlighten our thinking and our actions each and every day.

As you read this book, I hope you will be thrilled and overwhelmed with appreciation to God for everything he has done to give us Scripture! Just as the giving of his word over so many years to so many writers in a variety of circumstances is truly remarkable, so is God’s preservation of his word, despite attempts to silence and even eradicate it altogether! Because God has done that, Scripture can be light in the various dark (and light) places of our lives. May God grant that as you read, you will be thankful that God has not left us to wander and stumble through life without knowing the way to him, and may you be even more determined than before to follow the precepts for the God-pleasing life that Peter exhorted his readers to pursue. Christianity and the Christian way of life are not some cleverly constructed myths and legends. They are truth and they give abundant life and eternal life, because they follow God’s light, Scripture!

I

Creating Scripture

Chapter

Two

Light Unveiled

The Doctrine of Revelation

Before there was Scripture there was divine revelation. And without divine revelation there could be no Scripture. These are two of the most fundamental tenets in the evangelical doctrine of Scripture. As for God, in 1 Timothy 6:16, Paul wrote that he lives in "unapproachable [aprositon] light." His truth provides both light and life for all of humanity.

Physical light warms and it also uncovers things hidden in our way. If we attend to it, light can keep us from stumbling and falling over obstacles in our path. On the other hand, darkness is a problem. The blind must find their way in life by some means other than following where their vision leads them. Of course, those who can see and who yet live in darkness can misstep, stumble, and fall just as a blind person or someone blinded by too much light. Life’s challenges are easier to handle in the light of day, unless there is so much light that it blinds us.

While this is true of our physical sight, it also applies to our moral and spiritual perception. Scripture contrasts those who live according to God’s will and plan with those who choose to go their own way and ignore or disobey the light of God’s truth. The apostle John contrasts these two groups as people of light and people of darkness (1 John 2:8–11).1 Clearly, the light and darkness that John speaks of are moral, for he says that whether or not one loves his brother determines whether he walks in darkness or in light. In his Gospel, John also says that Jesus is the light who shone in the darkness; sadly, the darkness neither understood nor embraced him (John 1:4–5). Jesus emphatically proclaimed that he is the light of the world and that whoever follows him will have the light of life (John 8:12).

People need both physical and spiritual light in order to survive, and both come from God. The same God who spoke physical light into existence is also the source and giver of spiritual light for our souls. The transmitting of that light is what theologians call revelation. The doctrine of revelation is not only foundational to the doctrine of Scripture, but to all of theology. Of course, logically speaking, the existence of God is more fundamental, for if there is no God, there would be nothing else. But humans would know nothing about God’s character, acts, and relationships if he had remained completely silent. Humans might speculate about God and his demands, but theology would be nothing but speculation. So, the questions of whether God has given revelation, and of how, when, and in what form(s) are of utmost import. At stake is not just whether academic theologians will have grist for their theological mills. Of far greater import is whether God exists, what he is like, and what he expects of us. If God exists but has remained silent, or if he has spoken but his revelation is mere gibberish, the human race would be hopelessly lost in moral and spiritual darkness.

Putting aside the question of whether the members of the Trinity have been revealing themselves to each other for all eternity, we can say that the first act of divine revelation manifested outside the Godhead was creation. If nothing else, God unveiled the fact that he can make something out of nothing. Creation also makes it possible for God’s human creatures to discover that God exists and has certain attributes (see Psalm 19 and Rom. 1:19–20). Of course, until God created angels and humans there were no creatures who could receive and understand the truth God had uncovered about himself by creating.

Genesis 1–3 shows that, after God created Adam and Eve, there were occasions when he spoke to them. Why, before Adam and Eve fell into sin and were blinded to truth (spiritual and otherwise), did they need revelation? Revelation was necessary because, even before the fall, Adam and Eve were finite intellectually, morally, and spiritually. Their finitude was not sinful, but because of it there were many things about their world and themselves that they did not know. And, there must have been gaps in their knowledge about the God who had created them, especially about what he expected of them. How could it make sense for a creature accountable to its creator to remain ignorant of that creator? And, why would a God who fashioned a creature whom he could love and with whom he could have fellowship remain aloof and silent? It makes abundant sense that God and humans would seek each other out to establish and grow a relationship. As that relationship would grow, surely God would uncover and divulge more about who he is and who they are.

Once Adam and Eve (and the human race through them) broke God’s law and stood condemned before him, they understood that they deserved punishment, but they did not know how to solve their precarious situation. A loving and merciful God knew the answer. To give them that answer required that, in the words of the writer of Hebrews, God would speak in many ways to the human race (Heb. 1:1). And so God began to unveil himself and his truth to a lost and dying race of sinners.

Defining Divine Revelation

Though the doctrine of revelation is foundational to all of theology, unfortunately it is a concept that is somewhat ambiguous as used in Christian parlance and in evangelical theology. Let me illustrate this point.

Searching for a Clear Definition

The ambiguity of this concept surfaces when one looks for a clear and concise definition of what evangelicals mean by revelation. Consider the following definitions from various evangelical theologians.

W. G. T. Shedd writes that revelation in its general and wide signification is any species of knowledge of which God is the ultimate source and cause.2 Millard Erickson states that because of human finitude, the only way to know God is for God to reveal himself to us. He adds that by this we mean God’s manifestation of himself to man in such a way that man can know and fellowship with him.3 Interestingly, in a second edition of his Christian Theology, Erickson more tersely wrote, Because humans are finite and God is infinite, if they are to know God it must come about by God’s manifestation of himself.4 Louis Berkhof writes that when we speak of revelation, we use the term in the strict sense of the word. It is not something in which God is passive, a mere ‘becoming manifest,’ but something in which He is actively making Himself known. It is not, as many moderns would have it, a deepened spiritual insight which leads to an ever-increasing discovery of God on the part of man; but a supernatural act of self-communication, a purposeful act on the part of the Living God.5 And, Lewis S. Chafer affirms that in its theological sense, revelation refers to the divine act of communicating to man what otherwise man would not know.6

While each definition has something to commend it, each is also somewhat ambiguous, reflecting the ambiguity of the concept itself. Shedd says that revelation is any kind of knowledge of which God is the ultimate source. But since God created everything ex nihilo, he must, then, be the ultimate source of the fact that I am now looking at my computer monitor, that 2 + 2 = 4, and that yesterday I went to the health club for a workout. Certainly, such information is not what theologians mean when they speak of divine revelation.

Erickson’s two versions of a definition say that revelation is God’s manifestation of himself to us. The earlier version says that God does this in such a way that we can know and fellowship with him. But what does it mean for anyone, God included, to manifest himself or herself to others? Is this done in actions, speech, dreams, etc.? And how can a God who is pure Spirit do any of these things? As pure Spirit, he is immaterial, and thus doesn’t have a voice box and so apparently can’t speak in ways humans can hear with their physical ears.7 Moreover, both versions of Erickson’s definition make it difficult to see how there can be any revelation of God in nature. In what sense does the natural world manifest God, and if it somehow does, how does it do so in a way that allows humans to have fellowship with him? Theologians of various stripes have denied that natural revelation presents a way to establish a saving relationship with God, so how can that kind of revelation manifest God clearly enough for us to both know and have fellowship with him?

Berkhof’s definition seems a bit more specific, but it too is ambiguous. Berkhof calls revelation God’s actively making himself known by a supernatural act of self-communication. But what is the content of revelation, according to this definition? Is it God himself, God’s actions in history, information about God, or what? And how does a God without a material voice box and mouth communicate, if communication here refers to speech? We should also add that Berkhof’s definition is one that Søren Kierkegaard, Karl Barth, and others of their ilk could heartily endorse. Barth especially might be pleased, for one way of reading this definition seems to rule out any kind of natural revelation, a point that Barth emphatically made to Emil Brunner in Barth’s Nein! Berkhof actually does believe in natural revelation, but his definition of revelation gives reason to wonder.8

What about Chafer’s definition? Here the problem is that it seems too restrictive. It covers only things that we would otherwise not know. This definition fits such biblical information as revelation of end-time events in advance of their occurrence, information about heaven and hell, and biblical narratives about people like Jonah, Job, Rahab, the centurion at Christ’s cross, and Ananias and Sapphira, to name a few. But outside of Scripture and natural revelation it is possible to collect some, even if meager, information about the history of Israel and her kings, about some general events in Christ’s life, and about Paul’s various missionary trips to evangelize the lost and start churches. Since there is some information about these matters that is neither in Scripture nor in nature, does Chafer’s definition mean that when we read of such things in Scripture, those portions can’t be revelation since there are other ways than divine revelation for us to know about them? Surely, Chafer would reject such a notion, but even so, his definition is ambiguous enough to allow that interpretation of various portions of Scripture.

Perhaps readers may think I’m just being too picayune, but that would miss my point. All of the theologians cited are wonderful men of God and outstanding theologians who understand the concept of revelation. I am not critiquing their theologies. My point is that the concept of revelation is difficult to define. Even when one thinks it is precisely defined, one soon sees that the definition needs to be qualified further either to avoid the ambiguities explained above, or to accommodate something else that is true of revelation.

Uses of the Term Revelation

A second indication of the ambiguity surrounding the notion of revelation is the many ways it is used both in common parlance and in Scripture itself. Consider the following:

1. "Then the glory of the

Lord

will be revealed, and all flesh will see it together; for the mouth of the

Lord

has spoken." (Isa. 40:5)

2. As I’ve been praying and reading God’s word, the Lord has been revealing that he wants me to become a missionary in a foreign country.

3. Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. (Matt. 16:17)

4. Let us therefore, as many as are perfect, have this attitude; and if in anything you have a different attitude, God will reveal that also to you. (Phil. 3:15)

5. God has shown me through my relationship with Jesus that Jesus is more than just a great moral teacher; he is also God.

6. The heavens are telling of the glory of God; and their expanse is declaring the work of His hands. Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night reveals knowledge. (Ps. 19:1–2)

7. The man who murdered his two children explained, Just like God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, he told me to take my children’s lives, and that’s why I did it. You always have to obey whatever God tells you to do.

8. And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried out with a loud voice, saying to all the birds which fly in mid-heaven, ‘Come, assemble for the great supper of God. . . . ’ (Rev. 19:17)

9. First Peter 3:18–22 is very hard to understand, but after asking God for wisdom, I looked again, and God answered my prayer; I finally got it.

10. Boasting is necessary, though it is not profitable; but I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord. I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—was caught up into Paradise, and heard inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak. (2 Cor. 12:1–4)

Even short reflection on the sentences above shows them to be a mixture of many things. If asked to define the concept of divine revelation based on these ten examples, it is hard to see how we could do it. And yet, the list contains Scriptures and samples of conversations that many readers have heard or engaged in themselves. Surely, not all of the ten sentences teach the biblical concept of divine revelation. Or do they?

Let us briefly consider each of the ten sentences. Isaiah 40:5 speaks of God’s glory being revealed and all flesh seeing it. What sort of thing is glory and how might it be revealed? And to guarantee that this will happen, the verse ends by saying that the mouth of the Lord has spoken. But God as incorporeal doesn’t have a mouth, and anyway, is divine speech revelation? If it is, how can it be in this instance, since the verse speaks of doing something (revealing God’s glory) that is hard to understand? What does this verse teach that helps us articulate a precise definition of the concept?

How about sentence 2? Christians often make this claim, especially when they want to announce that they have made a decision. But is the sort of thing mentioned in sentence 2 an instance of the theological concept of divine revelation? If it is, it is dubious that it should be included in Scripture. So, then, does it qualify at all as revelation?

Sentence 3 is Jesus’s declaration after Peter affirms that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God. Jesus says that God revealed this truth to Peter. Most evangelical theologians would say this is an example of divine revelation, but if asked to explain how it differs from revelation in sentences 2, 6, and 10, there is no easy answer.

Sentence 4 is a Scripture verse that speaks of God directly revealing something to individuals. Perhaps God might reveal someone’s disagreeable attitude through a comment made by another believer, but not necessarily. But when God shows someone that he has an attitude that needs changing, is that revelation? One might respond that it must be because sentence 4 is a Scripture verse and all of Scripture is divine revelation. Indeed, Philippians 3:15 is divine revelation, but that doesn’t mean that what it talks about qualifies in itself as revelation. Nor does it certify that whenever God shows someone that he or she has a disagreeable attitude, that qualifies as divine revelation.

Sentence 5 speaks of a great doctrinal truth of the Christian faith. Without Scripture teaching this truth, most wouldn’t conclude this about Jesus. A new Christian might, as she experiences life in Christ, come to this realization; even a more mature Christian can learn spiritual truth by living with the Lord. But is the situation imagined in sentence 5 what theologians mean when they speak of divine revelation?

The verses from Psalm 19 (sentence 6) are again about revealing God’s glory. However, this time it is not God who reveals, but the heavens, night, and day. Of course, this is beautiful poetic language, but it does mean something literal. What should we make of it? It is hard to imagine how impersonal objects (sun, moon, stars, etc.) that don’t possess minds can disclose anything. To say they do personifies them. But what does all of this mean about how we should understand the theological concept of divine revelation?

Sentence 7 is frighteningly close to what we sometimes hear when a mass murderer explains his motive for killing many people. It is easy to say he is insane, for God, we think, would never reveal such a thing. Whatever went on in the killer’s mind had nothing to do with God or divine revelation, or so we think.

But God did command Abraham to offer up Isaac as a sacrifice. And God did tell the Israelites to go into the Promised Land and utterly wipe out the Canaanites. So, perhaps the lunatic murderer wasn’t so crazy after all? If God gave such revelations in biblical times, why not today as well? Our minds recoil at such thoughts, but explaining how an incident today is not revelation while God’s commands to Abraham and to Israel were is not so easy.

Then, the Revelation 19 passage (sentence 8) relays a vision John saw. But so far, most if not all of our examples, have spoken of revealing information—words. Though John records words he heard an angel say, all of what he describes happened in a vision. Does that mean a vision can be revelation? Revelation 19 is part of Scripture, so it must, evangelicals would say, qualify as revelation, but this isn’t the sort of thing one thinks of when one thinks of God’s words of revelation.

To be sure, many of us can identify with sentence 9, especially if we have ever studied a difficult passage. But is this an instance of revelation? If the reader can’t understand the passage, then is it divine revelation? If, as a result of divine aid, the imaginary person comes to understand the passage, does that mean that a Scripture passage at one time can be revelation and not so at another?

And finally, in sentence 10 Paul recounts an experience he had fourteen years before writing about it. He says that he has had revelations from the Lord (2 Cor. 12:1). Surely, then, he considers what he relates in verses 2–4 to be a revelation. Paul does not tell what he saw in paradise, but he does tell what he heard. However, he says that he heard inexpressible (arrēta) words. The Greek term arrētos can have at least two meanings. Something may be inexpressible because it is beyond human powers to speak it. Or it can be inexpressible because, even though it could be put into human words, one isn’t allowed